In the not too distant past people have carried money around in wheelbarrows as currencies collapse, I don't think we've reached that point. There may have been public disorder (ie riots) but not disorder in the economic sense I mean.
Cypriot bank savers forced to pay towards Euro/IMF bailout
- Thread starter Sasaferrato
- Start date
In the not too distant past people have carried money around in wheelbarrows as currencies collapse, I don't think we've reached that point. There may have been public disorder (ie riots) but not disorder in the economic sense I mean.
How do you mean? Not collapse. Not anywhere near collapse.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You have forwarded the argument that the Cypriot non-wealthy had this coming as they didn't pay enough attention. They voted three weeks ago for a candidate who promised this would not happen.
Bail-out argument should read as this configuration of this bail-out. If you think there was another possible configuration then your arguments just melt away - whilst revealing that there was a particular political motivation for this configuration being pushed forward. A general argument about bail-outs is worthless here.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
Come on TruX, it's not really a tricky one. How would you feel if you had 6.7% of your life savings directly and forcably extracted to clear the debts of corrupt banker scum and criminal mafia thugs by international entities that are also demanding massive national austerity and privatisation?
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Have we both lived alternate but parallel universe type lives?
Surely it was and is still touch and go on rather more fronts that are really good for the nerves
I think that's my point.
TruXta
tired
It's not about what I feel though. Besides surely some of the tax I've paid here in the UK has gone to bailing out criminals that demand (and have) others pay for their crimes.
Anyway - wasn't part of the complication that loads of dodgy mafia money would also be part of this expropriation? Can't see that being a bad thing tbh. I say grab all of that cash first.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I have read the thread honestly!
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
I don’t see why that is “making sure” that the cuts happen. They are going to happen anyway whether they’d included this savings levy or whether they hadn’t. If the savings levy is removed, I think that they’ll just make it up with more austerity.
I think you’ve actually misunderstood my posts. Sas started this thread describing it as EU theft in the normal terms used by right wingers frothing at the mouth at the EU. I’ve been largely responding to that and saying that I consider a tax on savings is better than cutting benefits and services. That argument isn’t directed at you it’s directed at sas and coley and people from the right who I suspect prefer cutting benefits and services.
Since Sas’ first post you’ve broadened the argument to the one you’ve given above which is fair enough. I’m still responding in large measure to people who don’t like the idea of a wealth tax. So, I don’t really see what the problem was with my post that you described as crazy (I didn’t see your comment at the time otherwise I’d have queried it then). It said I preferred a tax on savings rather than a reduction in benefits. You say that nobody on the thread disagrees with a proper wealth tax –people like sas I think do disagree with a proper wealth tax.
I’ve taken note of the arguments against the savings tax, and I agree with them which is why I’ve said the poor should be taken out of the measure. I’d incidentally be interested to see the figures on the proportion of money that will come from people having savings below/above the €100,000, though. Without that, I can’t say whether it’s a sticking plaster on the rich or not.
Most people on the thread flatly oppose the levy. I still think that doing that means that the Cypriots will be given the same package but additional austerity to make up for it. Then the rich won’t even be paying the amount they would be paying under this measure. I seem to remember one of the sources you quoted said that one proposal was to only tax above €100,000. I’d think it would be better to press for that rather than flatly oppose it.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
They're the people getting paid btw.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
2 billion from the above 100 grand, the rest from the non-wealthy.
Who is opposing a wealth wealth tax on this thread?
They oppose the levy because of its effect on the non-wealthy.
So you agree with the people that you're adamant that you disagree with.
TruXta
tired
Grab all that cash too.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
OK, first off, the need to prevent the banking system freezing solid says nothing about the ways in which this should be prevented. There is no reason that government could not have nationalised retail banking, recovering as much as possible from the tangled web of investments within the banking system, and simply confiscating CDOs where a clear chain of ownership could not be established, seized the essentially stolen assets of the banks and individual bankers, and left investors to rue their shit decision-making, as investors are theoretically required to do under free-market capitalism.
The particular problem for the poorer Eurozone countries is that the richer Eurozone countries got rich pumping up their bubbles and they are now being expected to pay for the cost of cleaning up after that boom. It's a bit like Westminster making the residents of Newcastle pay for Northern Rock and Edinburgh for RBS, and having all the money accumulate in London whilst expecting local councils to meet the cost of local unemployment from local taxes. This is why a more Federal Europe, where rich countries subsidise poor countries, just as counties in the UK and states in the US do, is one of the ways forward for the Euro.
The 'periphery' is primarily fucked by not being able to print their own currency, the same thing that fucks up a lot of developing economies who have no choice but to borrow in someone else's currency. Ireland and Spain were both running surpluses before the crisis, but the interest rate on their debt has soared because the European Central Bank refused to print any money for so long and even now what interventions it will now countenance are too limited to make much difference. The Austerians are still committed to austerity because it is extremely profitable for those who have the power to tell the politicians what to do.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Not just life-savings, whatever is left of your pay cheque too. Anyone who is usually overdrawn/in debt by the time the next pay cheque is due will still pay this tax if they got paid recently enough to be above zero.
Cypriot property magnates with Swiss bank accounts will pay zero, of course.
Jeff Robinson
Marxist-Lentilist: Jackboots and Jackfruit
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
The bailout terms that you gave in your post I agree with you and disagree with the terms. That isn’t/wasn’t the thread title, though.
Sas’ original thread title was ‘Naked theft by the scum that is the EU hierachy’. That I disagree with. A few people like froggy and ymu seem to agree with it. I almost agree with it myself but not in the way that Sas agrees with it which is why I disagreed with it.
The new thread title is ‘Cypriot bank savers forced to pay towards Euro/IMF bailout’. I disagree with the way it has been done but in principle I have no problem with savers being taxed in this way. I suspect Sas at least (who's thread it is) rejects a wealth tax. Others seem to be saying that they disagree with a savings tax even if it’s a wealth tax because it isgoing to crash the banks and people with money will just take it elsewhere. I don’t know whether I agree with that or not but it’s probably a fair point of view.
So I disagree with people who get hot under the collar when savings are targeted but feel that it's a jolly good idea when benefits are targeted. I agree with people who don't like the poor savers being targeted but probably disagree with them that we should just oppose the savings levy on principle because it targets poor people too. I'd prefer to having a savings levy that doesn't target poor people, and I'm sure many people (although not all) agree with this too.
I think that's everyone that I agree and disagree with.
junglevip
Marijuana leads to heron
"The amount of debt worldwide is more than all of the bank accounts in the world, and the current financial situation in Cyprus is the inevitable next phase: Confiscation"
http://rt.com/op-edge/debt-cyprus-financial-confiscation-441/
http://rt.com/op-edge/debt-cyprus-financial-confiscation-441/
gosub
~#
Probably closer to the current position, but Reuters, based on the Cypriot Central Bank report in Jan has it the other way round <100,000 pay 2.0bn
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
You've name-checked me without acknowledging any part of the arguments I made. Thanks for that.
It is not a wealth tax.
ymu
Niall Ferguson's deep-cover sock-puppet
Not sure who 'them' is but they probably are scum.
My point is that your entire argument, and that of Philip Inman, rests on calling this a wealth tax. If you acknowledge my point you have to agree that you are arguing with a straw man.
This is not a wealth tax.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
So, back you to your original posts and criticisms of those attacking the current proposal then. What are they doing?
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
The only criticism I have is that in opposing the sales levy the opposition could be just adding to the austerity measures if the sales levy is thrown out.
I'm not criticising ordinary people who will lose money from attacking the current proposal. I however also think that the well off in Cyprus will criticise the current proposal because those with large amounts in the bank will lose more from it than just austerity or say quantative easing which as I understand it just pushes money upwards.
I take the point that most rich people may not keep huge amounts of money at the bank. I think quite of a lot of them do, though.
I'm not criticising ordinary people who will lose money from attacking the current proposal. I however also think that the well off in Cyprus will criticise the current proposal because those with large amounts in the bank will lose more from it than just austerity or say quantative easing which as I understand it just pushes money upwards.
I take the point that most rich people may not keep huge amounts of money at the bank. I think quite of a lot of them do, though.
Similar threads
- Locked
